What do you make of this?

Started by DownFanatic, June 29, 2011, 03:33:59 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

deiseach

Quote from: bcarrier on June 29, 2011, 07:34:34 PM
There has to be more to this case than this...there are practical ways around the rule. Why dont they just register at an address within the correct parish.

If that's unofficial GAA policy on this rule then they might as well do away with it

armaghniac

Firstly, surely this problem has arisen before in this area, where people are attending the neighbouring school?

I am not of favour of people being allowed float between clubs as it undermines the ethos of the GAA. However a club boundary should reflect reality on the ground, not parishes or anything else if this is not appropriate.
MAGA Make Armagh Great Again

muppet

Quote from: ExcellentDriver on June 29, 2011, 06:02:27 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on June 29, 2011, 04:37:23 PM
madness.
live beside a club. should play for it.
esp as they are only kids and not glory hunting armagh-heads looking for senior clubs in Dublin !!

it saddens me to see two kids dragged through the crap over this.
would not be surprised if they never play football again - thats flipping stupid stuff.

some of these fellas in the clubs need a good kick in the head

Here here Lynchbhoy.

Hear, hear.

.. except the kick in the head.
MWWSI 2017

muppet

Very good post Fionntamhnach.

I disagree with some of your first paragraph. The Law has got involved in NGOs before e.g. Ryanair banning unions. The High Court upheld the right of free association, twice. The Supreme Court overruled the High Court on a technicality in another case, something to do with Labour Court procedures though not the issue of free association. The argument you don't have to work for Ryanair so they can ban you from a Union didn't stand up.

I agree completely with your second paragraph.

I disagree with the 3rd. How could an Irish Court rule on international eligibility other than in the case of Ireland (GFA accepted)? Anywhere else would be outside its jurisdiction. (E.G could an Irish court rule whether or not you should play for France?). That doesn't compare in this case.

Finally I agree with the last paragraph and a number of posters have hinted at this. The Courts might also frown at a rule that is interpreted arbitrarily all over the country, depending on the local County Board personalities.
MWWSI 2017

Ciarrai_thuaidh

There is more to this case than meets the eye..they have been at loggerheads before over players...not really either sides fault, but the shape/structure of Firies parish is such that Faha National school (main supplier of Listry underage players) is just inside the border,and many who reside in Firies parish (but are much further from Firies/Farranfore villages, and regard themselves as from Faha/Listry more than anywhere else) attend school in Faha...If you look at the map of the area you will see what I mean...(its just northwest of Killarney)...I agree that there has to be rules to protect clubs, especially against poaching, but there has to be some leniency shown in a case like this as these people are suffering because of some lines drawn on a map 200 years ago by a Bishop or whoever. If the parish rule was stringently applied across the board there would be hundreds of cases across the country where people would be prevented from playing with what in their heart is THEIR CLUB..I would be one of these people,which is why I feel for the young lads involved in this case. I understand the GAA viewpoint that if they allow 1 case to slip through, then there will be a deluge, but a sensible analysis on a case by case basis would easily determine the genuine cases and the not so genuine.
"Better to die on your feet,than live on your knees"...

Armaghtothebone

Remember when I played under-age football. Your heart is always with "your" club. Tried to explain this to work colleagues of the non gael type once, you dont pick a club or glory hunt, your club is you.
I have'nt lived in my "home town" in 25 years but they're still my club. My father has'nt lived in the parish of his club in 60 years but ask him and its his club.
Those 2 youngsters know what their club is. let them play for it.

Lone Shark

Instinctively I'm falling into the group that would suggest that they should play for the club that represents their parish, the distance to the playing field really shouldn't come into it. I appreciate that this is a tough case but unless the clubs want to sit down and agree a border change among themselves, then you have to have boundaries somewhere and unless we create perfectly square parishes, you'll have cases where your nearest GAA field might not be your own club. 11km vs 1.5km is an extreme example, but there would be people in my own parish who would be in a similar situation in that it would be well over a ten minute drive to our pitch and they'd come within a stones throw of another club on their way there, but that's just the way the parishes are.

Kerry Mike

The parish rule has divided many families in Kerry over the years, I had it myself where the club I played for was 9 miles over a mountain pass though I lived closer to another more successfull club just 3 miles away, I was asked to transfer once but never did though cousins and neighbours went and played and there were a few court cases over the years. its never a happy outcome and it still irks some people when certain players names come up in conversation. Its always the transfer to a bigger club you never hear of cases of players wanting to go the other way ??
2011: McGrath Cup
AI Junior Club
Hurling Christy Ring Cup
Munster Senior Football

Ciarrai_thuaidh

Quote from: Kerry Mike on June 29, 2011, 10:54:09 PM
The parish rule has divided many families in Kerry over the years, I had it myself where the club I played for was 9 miles over a mountain pass though I lived closer to another more successfull club just 3 miles away, I was asked to transfer once but never did though cousins and neighbours went and played and there were a few court cases over the years. its never a happy outcome and it still irks some people when certain players names come up in conversation. Its always the transfer to a bigger club you never hear of cases of players wanting to go the other way ??

In this case though Mike they want to play for Listry (havent been been seen above Div 4 in a long time) as opposed to Firies who float between Div 2 and 3 so they can hardly be accused of glory-hunting. I just feel really sorry for the kids.

By the way, what part of South Kerry are you from?! ;)
"Better to die on your feet,than live on your knees"...

muppet

Quote from: Armaghtothebone on June 29, 2011, 09:52:57 PM
Remember when I played under-age football. Your heart is always with "your" club. Tried to explain this to work colleagues of the non gael type once, you dont pick a club or glory hunt, your club is you.
I have'nt lived in my "home town" in 25 years but they're still my club. My father has'nt lived in the parish of his club in 60 years but ask him and its his club.
Those 2 youngsters know what their club is. let them play for it.

+1

For the record I only ever played for one club. I only ever wanted to play for one club and I still consider it my club even if I have lived in Dublin for yonks now. However that was my choice.

The fact that I was shite may have meant only one club would have me but there you go.

Fionntamhnach, you are obviously more legally educated than most of the rest of us. Would (as the widespread commentary here may show) suggestions that the rule could/should have been ignored/bent and common sense have been applied, be a problem if it could be shown that many individuals have benefitted from such common sense (on this issue) before?
MWWSI 2017

David McKeown

A few things strike me about this case.

1. Its very similar to a case that was before the DRA about 5 years ago (involving two Cork clubs) where the DRA ruled that the effect of the constitutional right to Freedom of Association meant an individual could not be banned from joining the association as a whole but did not extend to allowing an individual to join a club of their choice.

2.  This matter does not seem to have come before the DRA (possibly because of the previous ruling) and seems to have gone directly to the high court which is very unusual in the last five years.

3. I despise the parish rule, I know a lot of posters have mentioned that bigger clubs will poach players to which I say let them, the essence of the association for me is that you should want to play for the club you are playing for, with your friends and neighbours you shouldn't be forced to play for the club.   Ive fallen out with my club in the past over transfers, but no player especially a child should be compelled to play for a club if their heart isnt in it.  God knows how many players we have lost because of the rule.

4.  I coach a soccer team and last year we lost two of our best players to Crusaders so I've been on the end of players being poached and whilst its disappointing Id rather being coaching kids who were enjoying themselves playing for my team. Likewise i prefer playing in a team with my mates than in a team with star players
2022 Allianz League Prediction Competition Winner

muppet

Quote from: David McKeown on June 30, 2011, 12:39:57 AM
A few things strike me about this case.

1. Its very similar to a case that was before the DRA about 5 years ago (involving two Cork clubs) where the DRA ruled that the effect of the constitutional right to Freedom of Association meant an individual could not be banned from joining the association as a whole but did not extend to allowing an individual to join a club of their choice.

That means rules 21 and 27 were unconstitutional and would still be if they still existed?
MWWSI 2017

David McKeown

#57
Quote from: muppet on June 30, 2011, 12:51:41 AM
Quote from: David McKeown on June 30, 2011, 12:39:57 AM
A few things strike me about this case.

1. Its very similar to a case that was before the DRA about 5 years ago (involving two Cork clubs) where the DRA ruled that the effect of the constitutional right to Freedom of Association meant an individual could not be banned from joining the association as a whole but did not extend to allowing an individual to join a club of their choice.

That means rules 21 and 27 were unconstitutional and would still be if they still existed?

Sorry it appears i didnt remember the decision quite correctly given that its been four years since I read it thats maybe not a surprise

The decision is available here and covers a lot more than just Freedom of Association

http://www.sportsdra.ie/documents/dra22005.pdf

The relevant section though is as follows

Finally, the right to freely associate cannot impose on an organisation a requirement to permit entry. The right of the Claimants to freely associate is only limited to the extent that their participation within the GAA is limited. There is no rule of law which could require the GAA to admit members save on the terms that they deem fit. While it may be disingenuous of the Respondent to suggest that the right of association of the Claimants is not affected by the condition imposed on the Druipseach Club's under-age teams, it seems clear from an analysis of the case law that the extent to which their freedom to associate is restricted is permitted by law.

So instead of this

Quote from: David McKeown on June 30, 2011, 12:39:57 AM
A few things strike me about this case.

1. Its very similar to a case that was before the DRA about 5 years ago (involving two Cork clubs) where the DRA ruled that the effect of the constitutional right to Freedom of Association meant an individual could not be banned from joining the association as a whole but did not extend to allowing an individual to join a club of their choice.

My point should have read

1. Its very similar to a case that was before the DRA about 5 years ago (involving two Cork clubs) where the DRA ruled that the effect of the constitutional right to Freedom of Association meant that when an individual met all the requirements for joining the association as a whole the could not be prevented from doing so however that right did not extend to allowing an individual to join a club of their choice even if the met all other requirements for memberships


I do remember heavily criticising the decision the last time I read it but I cant remember why off the top of my head and dont really want to reread the whole decision, the long and short of your question Muppet is that I dont know but might look into it next time I get an hour or two.
2022 Allianz League Prediction Competition Winner

NaomhBridAbú

it wont matter a shite...in 5 years or so, they'll be lining out for St Brendans in London
in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. but he still only has one eye

blewuporstuffed

surely if there are some strong family ties to a certain club (father / family members played for them or whatever) that this should allow the lads to play for that club ino matter what parish they live in.

i live just outside the parish of my club, but they are still my club and always will be.
i feel no association whatso ever to the club of the parish that my house happens to be in.
I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either